Re: Reserved keywords

["Grisha" <grisha@...>]

I understand that it has some difficulties in realisation, but I think the
language will benefit if 'sugar' elements will function exactly as their
counterparts.

with respect,
Grisha

----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Silverstone" <dsilvers@digital-scurf.org>
To: "Lua list" <lua@bazar2.conectiva.com.br>
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 8:09 PM
Subject: Re: Reserved keywords


> On Tue, 2003-11-25 at 16:54, Grisha wrote:
> > Not quite true. These languages don't have such 'syntatic sugar' things.
> > IMHO, if a.b is just a syntatic sugar for a["b"] it must work exactly
the
> > same way.
>
> I think you're missing the point that the syntactic sugar is of them
> form:
>
> IDLEXEME1 '.' IDLEXEME1
> <=functionally equivalent to=>
> IDLEXEME '[' STRINGIFY(IDLEXEME2) ']'
>
> 'else' 'if' 'do' etc are not IDLEXEMEs and as such, don't fit the syntax
>
> D.
>
> --
> Daniel Silverstone                       http://www.digital-scurf.org/
> Hostmaster, Webmaster, and Chief Code Wibbler: Digital-Scurf Unlimited
> GPG Public key available from keyring.debian.org       KeyId: 20687895
>
>